The Pending Israel-Palestine ICJ Advisory Opinion: Threats to Legal Principles and Security

EXCERPT

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is poised to eviscerate the longstanding “land for peace” legal framework for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which was established by UN Security Council (UNSC) resolutions and the Oslo Accords. It is the only framework for achieving peace that has been endorsed by Israel and all Arab League member States. Yet the ICJ—at the behest of the UN General Assembly (UNGA)—may soon advise that international law requires Israel to unilaterally and unconditionally withdraw from the disputed Palestinian territories.

Western interests in the case may appear limited to defending Israel, whose current government and policies regarding the territories are controversial. But the western allies in fact have their own additional fundamental national security interests at stake. Unless they take robust action in this case, the ICJ could not only eviscerate the sole agreed framework for achieving Israeli-Palestinian peace but also undercut the inherent rights of States to self-defense and sovereignty, undermine the UNSC’s authority to maintain international peace and security, and subvert the law of armed conflict (LOAC).